Database of Precedents

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	22/06/2020
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	Allocation of resources; Financial sustainability
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“In its last decision of inclusion the Register Committee flagged AAC-DEVA’s ability to acquire and consolidate the resources required to organise site-visits as part of its periodic re-accreditation procedures. As AAC-DEVA has been able to carry out site-visits within its procedures, the flag has been addressed. The Register Committee noted that AAC-DEVA acknowledged in its SWOT analysis that it did not achieved what it aspired it set out to do in the past five years. These concerns were mainly due to the current organisational structure of the agency and lack of strategic planning which has lead to difficulties in the proper allocation of resources and development of prospective units for the full implementation of thematic analysis. In its additional representation AAC-DEVA stated that it had been able to provide all the necessary resources to set up and maintain its external QA activities and that its budget has been approved without any reductions. Concerning the problems related to the structural organisation of the agency, AAC-DEVA explained that this are addressed in the development of its Strategic Plan. ”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by NASM
Decision of	06/06/2016
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	financial sustainability
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“The External Review Report reported that the initial costs for the setup of MusiQuE were borne by AEC, as its main founder. At the time of the review – MusiQuE did not have a sufficient amount of contracts or firm agreements with higher education institutions that would fully assure its ability to achieve self-sustainability.MusiQuE submitted the statement “Information on the financial sustainability of MusiQuE”, which included an update on the number of reviews planned and contracted for the years 2016 and 2017, as well as a financial commitment by AEC, EMU and Pearle*, for the years 2016 and 2017, applicable in case MusiQuE will not achieve self-sustainability. Beyond that, further support would be at the discretion of the organisations’ boards.The Register Committee considered that the financial commitment ensured MusiQuE’s equipment with sufficient resources for 2016 and 2017, while sustainability from 2018 onwards remained dependent on the number of reviews MusiQuE was able to carry out in practice.The Register Committee further underlined that MusiQuE is expected to make a Substantive Change Report (see §6.1 of the EQAR Procedures for Applications) in case its resource situation changes materially.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	13/10/2023
Standard	3.5 Resources
Keywords	resources, financial independance
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“26. The panel noted that the main challenge for NEAA remains the fact that it cannot manage its own finances in a manner that will enable NEAA to ensure the best quality of its activities. Even if the majority of the funding comes from its external quality assurance activities i.e., mostly accreditation fees, due to the strict regulations and rules defined on national level, NEAA cannot access these revenues. The Committee concurs with the panel that this could have a negative impact on the sustainability and the quality of its processes.

27. The panel underlined that despite the improvements and increase of staff members since its last review, from 8 to 19 staff members, NEAA still had a high number of vacant positions.

28. The Committee emphasised the panel’s recommendations on the need for the agency to pursue with the Ministry changes in its financial management and to continue the recruitment of new staff to ensure optimal workload and implementation of external QA processes on time.

29. In its representation, NEAA reported of a further increase in its staff (i.e., from 19 to 23 employees), with recruitment for some of these positions currently underway. The Committee noted that the agency has taken active steps addressing specific proposals to increase pay rates to the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Finance and the Prime Ministers office. Similar efforts are directed towards the Council of Rectors. Further, the agency stated that there are constant efforts made towards the responsible national authorities with a request to increase the budget of the agency.

30. The Register Committee welcomed the actions taken by NEAA. The Register Committee, however, noted that despite the improvements in NEAA’s permanent staff, the agency’s financial independence, due to external factors, remains constrained, and while the limitations in resources may not pose an immediate concern as to the sustainability of the agency, it may negatively impact the scope and quality of the activities undertaken by NEAA.

31. The Register Committee therefore concurred with the panel’s conclusion that NEAA complies only partially with ESG 3.5.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	14/03/2022
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Content of the thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“the content of the thematic publications mainly involved reflections on the agency’s own experiences in conducting EQA rather than analysis of the results of the EQA (an analysis which could be more appropriate to serve the internal quality assurance processes, ESG 3.6). The Committee agreed with the panel’s views that the agency could improve the content of the analyses so they are more meaningful for the wider academic and QA community”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	03/03/2023
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Lack of independent thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	Agency (24/02/2026)
RC decision	Partial compliance

“AVAP had conducted meta-analyses of their review activities before the pandemic but discontinued this practice. As

part of REACU, AVAP also carried out structured analyses of the situation of the university system. The agency, however, is not developing any thematic analysis independently.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Focused, coordinated by GAC
Decision of	12/12/2021
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Lack of development in preparing thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“7. The panel notes that AKAST reliably contributes the experience gained from its own quality assurance procedures to the regular evaluation of the Key Points and that the agency is documenting the results of its ongoing student survey on its website.

18. The Register Committee welcomes AKAST’s plan to further develop a thematic analysis after an appropriate number of programme accreditation procedures have been completed, but underlined that such an analysis has not been finalised.

19. Considering the limited development of thematic analysis, the Register Committee can follow the review panel conclusion that AKAST complies only partially with ESG 3.4.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	28/06/2022
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	separate research or bilbiometric analyses do not qualify as thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“38. The panel considered that HCERES' recent activities have been focused on research and bibliometric analysis; analyses drawing on the results of evaluations within the scope of the ESG have not been produced regularly since the summary reports that HCERES/AERES used to produce following earlier evaluation campaigns.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	25/10/2022
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Consistent publication of thematic analyses
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“The Register Committee learned that IQAA has published several thematic analyses since the last review. The panel, however, could not see

any formal plan for drafting and publishing these analyses.The Committee considered that despite the absence of a more formal planning the agency has developed a practice and demonstrated a clear vision for conducting analyses based on its EQA processes.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Focused, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	19/06/2019
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Introduced policy for thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Full compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“The Register Committee learned that QANU approved a new policy for thematic analysis in October 2018, which defines explicit aims and objectives for various analysis. The panel stressed that QANU acknowledged its responsibility for producing thematic analysis as a way of contributing to the further development of the university research sector in the Netherlands. The panel further added that QANU has demonstrated capacity to use the experiences it gathered, to reflect on them, to share them and to publish outcomes through thematic analysis. Following the evidence and analysis provided by the panel, the Register Committee concurred with the panel’s conclusion that QANU now complies with ESG 3.4.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	22/06/2020
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	absence of regular analysis based on agency’s findings
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“The panel specifically recommended that the agency “publishes reports of thematic analysis every year”. While the standard requires that such analyses be published "regularly”, it does not impose a specific cycle.

The Register Committee therefore underlined that this recommendation should rather be considered a suggestion.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	02/11/2020
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Lack of systematic approach to thematic analysis; Quality of analysis
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“The review panel found that BAC’s thematic review report provided a limited analysis, and was rather descriptive by simply summarising the content of inspection reports. Overall, the review panel felt there were still significant weaknesses in BAC’s approach to thematic analysis. In its additional representation, BAC agreed with the assessment of the panel and committed to prepare more meaningful thematic analysis that will serve to improve key areas related to the agency’s work by January 2021.While the Register Committee acknowledged the agency’s work towards improving its thematic analysis, the Committee remarked that such changes have not yet been implemented.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	22/06/2020
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Lack of systematic approach to thematic analysis; Absence of regular analysis;
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“The Register Committee noted that the agency has produced two analyses since its last review in 2014, both written in Russian but only published on the English version of AKKORK’s website. According to the panel, the last publication, however, does not meet the requirements of a thematic analysis. In particular, the panel noted the great qualitative difference between the publications, indicating a missing systematic approach to the publication of thematic analysis. The Register Committee underlines the panel’s recommendation that the agency should establish a clear process to address all of its activities in thematic analyses. ”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	05/11/2019
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Producing effective thematic analysis reports
Panel conclusion	Full compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“In its decision of 2015 to admit QQI to the Register, the Register Committee flagged for attention the production of thematic analyses by QQI.The Register Committee understood from the panel's report that QQI has been proactive and effective in producing a range of thematic analysis reports, which are considered useful in the sector for improving quality and quality assurance, even though not having completed full cycles in all external quality assurance activities.The Register Committee therefore considered that the flag has been addressed and concurred with the panel's conclusion that QQI complies withthe standard.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	05/11/2019
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Producing effective thematic analysis reports
Panel conclusion	Full compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“When evalag’s registration was last renewed, the Register Committee noted that the current review should address whether evalag produced analyses of the general findings of all reviews carried out by the agency. The review panel described clearly how evalag conducts thematic analyses based on the findings from its reviews. The Register Committee therefore concluded that the flag has been addressed.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	05/11/2019
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“In the previous review the panel found that Unibasq had yet to produce a system-wide analysis and there was a lack of sufficient resources which is why this standard was flagged.The panel recognised that Unibasq has made clear progress in this area in recent years. The reports that agency produces show a clear shift from the evaluation of the procedures to a genuine thematic analysis (see page 24 of the report).The Committee concluded that the flag has been addressed and concurred with the review panel’s conclusion that Unibasq complies with the standard.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	05/11/2019
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Producing effective thematic analysis reports
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“At the time of its previous review in 2014, the Register Committee noted that AQ Austria was working on its first thematic analysis report on the development of quality assurance in Austria, and has not yet produced documentation to evidence substantial compliance. In its 2019 review report the panel’s findings show that the agency has since produced a number of reports focused on the results of QA processes and related issues in higher education. While the Register Committee underlined the recommendations of the panel for a further development of the thematic analysis, the Register Committee concluded that the flag has been satisfactorily addressed.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	03/04/2019
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Implementation of thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“The Register Committee considered the panel's analysis as well as SQAA's statement on the panel report, referring to its recently published “methodology and procedure for drafting and disseminating system-wide and thematic analyses”. While the Committee welcomed the steps taken by SQAA to swiftly address the panel's recommendation, their actual implementation remains to be analysed within the next external review of SQAA.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by GAC
Decision of	20/06/2017
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	systematic approach to analyses and publishing
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“When AQAS last had its registration renewed, the publication of thematic analyses was flagged. Considering the review report, the Register Committee concluded that AQAS carried out a number of relevant internal analyses and produced relevant reports, e.g. the overarching report produced based on its accreditations in Moldova. These were, however, carried out on an ad-hoc basis, internal and not published as required by the standard. In its statement on the review report, AQAS explained that it had published a first set of thematic analyses on its website. While the Register Committee welcomed the efforts taken to date, it was not yet possible to conclude whether thematic analyses are produced regularly.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	20/06/2017
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Lack of thematic analyeses
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“While a number of thematic analyses have been published since the last external review of the agency, the panel found that the analyses have been paused since the merger of FINHEEC into FINEEC. The panel also noted that FINEEC has not yet initiated thematic analyses of the accreditations of engineering degree programmes due to the small number of finished accreditations. ”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	03/12/2016
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Lack of systematic approach/lack of resources
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“The panel stated that ACPUA has focused on thematic reports during its first year of existence, however the constraints on human and financial resources have hindered the agency’s activity in this area in recent years. Considering the increased number of external quality assurance activities carried out by ACPUA in recent years, the Register Committee underlined the panel’s recommendation to allocate sufficient resources to the activities supporting thematic analysis and ensure their implementation in a more systematic way”

Full decision: see agency register entry